SR-071288-12A (2)
*2-tf/o5
l2-~
""- 1 2 19'8"8
Santa Monica, California
.
.
CjED:PB:LM:lm
Council Mtg: July 12, 1988
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
SUBJECT: Appeal of Planning Commission Approval of Tentative
Parcel Map 19007 and Conditional Use Permit 487; A
Proposal to Construct a 4 Unit Condominium at 245
Hollister Avenue. Applicant: Barbara Coffman and
Associates. Appellant: David L. Ganezer.
INTRODUCTION
This report recommends that the City Council deny the SUbject
appeal and approve Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 487 and Tentative
Parcel Map (TPM) 19007 for a 4 unit condominium, as recommended
in the Planning Commission staff report, and approved by the
Planning Commission, by a vote of 6-0, on May 4, 1988.
The appellant cites the projects detrimental impact on the
surrounding neighborhood as grounds for the subject appeal
(Attachment A) .
BACKGROUND
On November 2, 1987 the Planning Commission continued the
applicant's request to construct a 3 story, 4 unit condominium at
245 Hollister Avenue. In continuing the hearing on the proposal,
the Planning Commission directed the applicant to meet with
adj acent neighbors and incorporate their concerns into revised
plans. The Planning Commission also directed the applicant to
reduce the height of the building to 2 stories, provide screening
- 1 -
12-A
dUL 1 2 138&
.
.
for the roof decks, and address the relocation of on-site
vegetation.
On May 4, 1988, after a public hearing, the Planning Commission
approved revised plans for the development of a 3 story, 4 unit
condominium. The applicant had met with neighbors in an attempt
to address their concerns. The overall height of the building
was reduced from 351 to 27' and the roof decks were set back from
the perimeter of the building and screened with a 42" high
parapet wall. In addition, the applicant agreed to maintain
significant on-site vegetation, and a condition to that effect,
Special Condition #2, has been placed on the project.
A more detailed project description may be found in the Planning
Commission staff report dated May 4, 1988 (Attachment B). The
Planning Commission statement of Official Action is included as
Attachment C of this report.
ANALYSIS
The proposal to construct a 3 story, 4 unit condominium at 245
Hollister Avenue is not subject to the Ocean Park Interim Zoning
Ordinance adopted by the city Council on August 11, 1987. The
application for the subject proposal was deemed complete prior to
the July 28, 1987 cutoff date imposed under the interim
ordinance, and the project may, therefore, be developed to the R3
zoning standards.
The structure, as originally designed, was 3 stories/35, in
height, with stairway enclosures providing access to the roof
- 2 -
.
.
decks extending an additional 9' above the roof line. (stairway
enclosures are permitted above the maximum height limit per SMMC
section 9126B.) The applicant has reduced the bui1ding1s overall
height from 3 stories/35I to 3 storieS/27I as measured the
average natural grade. The maximum height limit under the R3
zoning standards is 3 stories/40', and the maximum height limit
under the Ocean Park Interim Zoning Ordinance is 2 stories/27'.
Although the building exceeds the maximum number of stories
permitted under the Ocean Park Interim zoning ordinance, the
building1s overall height complies with the maximum height limit
imposed under the interim ordinance.
Under the R3 zoning requirements, a total of 4 units, or 1 unit
per l,250 square feet of lot area, are permitted on the 4,490
square foot lot in question. Under the Ocean Park Interim Zoning
Ordinance, a total of 3 units, or 1 unit per 1,500 square feet of
lot area, are permitted on the subj ect lot. At 4 units, the
subject proposal is at the maximum density permitted under the R3
zoning standards.
The SUbject proposal meets all applicable R3 zoning requirements
pertaining to building height, density and setback. The plans
approved by the Planning commission on May 4, 1988 reflect the
applicant's attempt to reduce the size and scale of the building
and address neighborhood concerns over the impact of the building
on adjacent residences. In addition, the roof decks have been
set back from the perimeter of the building so as to minimize any
impact to adjacent residents privacy, and the applicant has
agreed to maintain significant on-site vegetation. Also, the
- 3 -
.
.
applicant has provided side yard setbacks greater than the
minimum 41 required, and the building elevations along the side
property lines are articulated and stepped back at the upper
floors so as to minimize the impact of the proposed structure on
adjacent residents.
BUDGET/FINANCIAL IMPACT
The recommendation presented in this report does not have any
budget or fiscal impact.
CONSIDERATION
In acting on this item, the City Council may deny the appeal and
approve the Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Parcel Map with
the findings and conditions contained in the May 4, 1988 Planning
Commission statement of Official Action; may uphold the appeal by
denying the Conditional Use Permit and Tentative Parcel Map; or
otherwise act to approve, conditionally approve, or deny the
project as it deems appropriate.
RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully recommended that the Council deny the appeal
and approve Conditional Use Permit 487 and Tentative Parcel Map
19007 with the findings and conditions contained in the May 4,
1988 statement of Official Action.
Prepared by: Larry Miner, Assistant Planner
Paul Berlant, Director of Planning
Planning Division
Community and Economic Development Department
Attachments: A. Letter of Appeal by David L. Ganezer.
B. May 4, 1988 Planning Commission Staff Report.
- 4 -
PB: LM: 1m
PC/CUP487CC
06/07/88
.
.
c. May 4, 1988 Planning Commission statement of
Official Action.
D. Project Plans.
- 5 -
C Vi
. . , \"- i \ '''I t: 1'1 f i",
.
'" v - ~ - v-~ v - I I ' l
ju/IQ.- JS; m
--1.
Moy 23J 1988
-
\ .
TO Mr Paul BerJont, D1rector of Planmng
CIty Plann1ng D1vlslon
1685 Nal n Street -
Sante NomeoJ 90401
Dear Mr Berlent'
On behalf of the owners and tenants ot 2328 Thlrd Street, J hereby appeal
the 245 HoH1ster Project to the Clty Councl] on the grounds that it 18 not
10 the best mterest of the nelghborhood
If ony necessary 1tem 15 mIssIng from thIS appeol, pJeose not1fy me ot
2326 Thlrd street *8
Santa Mome8J CA 90405
(213) 396-6485
{;f)~~.:;.p L '~P'---
DOV1 d L Ganezer /'
I
~
.
i\ lTI"'L M I'-'\b N f \3. . _
(
....
CITY PLANNING DIVISION
Community and Economic Development Department
HEHORANDUM
DATE: May 4, 1988
TO: The Honorable Planning Commission
FROM: Planning staff
SUBJECT: CUP 487, TPM 19007
Address:
Applicant:
245 Hollister Avenue
Barbara Coffman and Associates
SID.frIA.RY
Action:
Application for Conditional Use Permit and Tentative
Parcel Map to construct a four unit condomlnium.
Recommendation: Approval.
SITE LOCA.TION AND DESCRIPTION
The subject property is a 4,940 square foot parcel located on the
north side of Hollister Avenue between 2nd and 3rd Streets, with
a frontage of 38 feet. surrounding uses consist of multi-unit
apartments to the north, south and east (R3) and a single-fam1ly
residence to the west (R3).
zoning District:~
~and Use District~
R3
Medium Density-Housing
,
Parcel Area:
4,940 Square Feet
PROPOSED PROJECT
This is an application to construct a 3 story 4 unit condominium.
All units have similar floor plans consisting of 3 bedrooms and 2
bathrooms. Access to the units will be from individual exterior
stairways leading from a ground level walkway, located along the
building I s western elevation, to the second floor. Exterior
stairways leading from the third floor living rooms in each unit
will provide access to the roof decks. The roof decks are set
back from the perimeter of the building so as to minimize any
impact to the adjacent resident's privacy. Balconies are
proposed to extend from t.he second and third floors along the
western elevation of the structure, and from the second floor
along the buildings southern elevation.
- 1 -
.
.(
f
;
A total of a subterranean parking spaces are provided with access
taken off of Hollister Avenue.
The applicant has filed a "Declaration for Permanent Single
Family Home Exemption If with the Rent Control Board in order to
remove the single family residence existing on the subject site.
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFORMANCE
The proposed project is consistent with the Municipal Code and in
conformity with the General Plan as shown in Attachment A.
~EQA STATUS
The proposed project is categorically Exempt per city of Santa
Monica Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQAi Class 3(2).
FEES
The proposed 4 unit condominium is subject to a Park and
Recreation Tax of $200.00 per unit, and a condominium Fac1lities
Tax of $1,000.00 per saleable unit.
BACKGROUND
On November 2, 1987 the subject proposal was brought before the
Planning commission. The proposal was cont1nued at that time,
and the applicant directed to redesign the structure based on
input from adjacent -neighbors. The Planning Commission also
directed the,applicant to address building height concerns, roof
deck screening, and the relocation ~f on-site vegetat1on.
The proposal is not subj act to the Ocean Park InteriM Zoning
Ordinance as adopted by City Council on August 11, 1987, and is
therefore subject to the standard R3 zoning regu1rements.
ANALYSIS
The appl icant has addressed the tw'o maj or issues the PI anning
Commission raised at the November 2, 1987 meeting. The applicant
has met with adjacent neighbors, the height of the building has
been substantially reduced, and the roof decks have been pushed
back from the perimeter of the building.
The subj ect proposal meets all R3 Planning and Zoning
requirements concerning height, lot coverage, setback and
density. The proposed structure will be 27' in height as
measured from an average natural grade of 47.521 to the top of
the roof. A parapet wall extends approximately 42" above the
roof. This proposal conforms to the maximum height limits imposed
under the Interim Ordinance. The previous proposal was 35' in
height with stairway enclosures extending an additional 91 above
the roof. The proposal is~at the maximum density of 4 units and
will provide a minimum of 4' side yards, a 10' front yard and 15'
rear yard.
- 2 -
.(
.
(
The average natural grade as indicated on the plans is 47.52' I
and the finished first floor elevation is the same. The
subterranean garage, therefore, does not constitute a story.
The parking plan has been approved by the Parking and Traffic
Division, and the City Engineer has appro~ed the tentative parcel
map.
~ONCLUSION
The proposed project is consistent with all applicable
regulations and, therefore, merits approval as conditioned below.
RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully recommended that CUP 487 and TPM 19007 be
approved with the following findings and conditions:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS
1. The proposed use and location are in accordance with good
zoning practice, in the public interest and necessary that
substantial justice be done and is compatible with
existing and potential uses within the general area,
traffic or parking congestion will not result, the public
health, safety and general welfare are protected and no
harm to adjace~t properties will result.
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP FINDINGS
1. The proposed subdivision, to~ether with its provision for
its design and improvements, is consistent with applicable
general and specific plans as adopted by the City of Santa
Monica.
2. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type o~-
development in that the project is an in-fill of urban
land adequately served by existing infrastructure and
having no significant physical site characteristics pre-
cluding the proposed development.
3. The design of the sUbdivision or the proposed improvements
will not cause substantial environmental damage or sub-
stantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their
habitat.
4. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvement
will not cause serious public health problems.
5. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements
will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public
at large, for acce~ through, or use of, property within
the proposed subdivision.
6. The design of the subdivision does not preclude future
passive or natural heating or Cooling opportunities.
- 3 -
.
.
(
TENTATIVE PARCEL ~~P CONDITIONS
1. All off site improvements required by the City Engineer
shall be installed. Plans and specifications for off site
improvements shall be prepared by a registered civil en-
gineer and approved by the City Engineer.
2. Before the City Engineer may approve the final map, a sub-
division improvement agreement for all off site improve-
Dents required by the City Engineer shall be prepared and
a performance bond posted through the ci ty Attorney's
office.
3. The tentative map shall expire 24 months after approval,
except as provided in the provisions of California Govern-
ment Code Section 66452.6 and sections 9380-9382 of the
Santa Monica Municipal Code. During this time period the
final map shall be presented to the City of Santa Monica
for approval.
4. The developer shall provide the Engineering Department of
the city of Santa Monica with one Dizal Cloth print
reproduction and microf~lm of each sheet of the final map
after recordation.
5. Prior to approval of the final map, Condominium Associa-
tion By-Laws (if applicable) and a Declaration of CC & R's
shall be reviewed and approved by the City Attorney. The
CC & R's shall contain a nondiscrimination clause as pres-
ented in Section 9392 (S~UIC) and in the case of ccndomin1-
ums, contain such provisions as are required by Section
9122E (Slfr1C).
6. The developer shall provide for payment of a Condominium
Tax of $l~OOO per saleable residential unit per the provi-
sions of section 6651 et seq. of the Santa_ Monic~-
Municipal Code.
7. The form, contents, accompanying data, and filing of the
final subdivision map shall conform to the provisions of
Sections 9330 through 9338 (S}lliC) and the Subdivision Map
Act. The required Final Map filing fee shall be paid
prior to scheduling of the Final Map for City Council
approval.
8. The final map shall be recorded with the Los Angeles Coun-
ty Recorder prior to issuance of any building permit for a
condominium proj ect pursuant to Government Code Section
66499.30.
9. A Park and Recreation Facilities Tax of $200.00 per
residential unit snPll be due and payable at the time of
issuance of a building permit for the construction or
placement of the residential unit(s) on the subject lot,
per and subject to the provisions of section 6670 et seq.
of the Santa Monica Municipal Code.
- 4 -
.
.(
pTANDARD CONDITIONS
1. The Conditional Use Permit shall be of no further force or
effect if Tentative Parcel Map 19007 expires prior to ap-
proval of a Final Map for said tract.
2. Plans for final design, landscapinq, screening, trash en-
closures, and signage shall be subject to review and ap-
proval by the Architectural Review Board.
3. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval
by the Director of Planning. A significant change in the
approved concept shall be subject to Planning Commission
Review. Construction shall be in substantial conformance
with the plans submitted or as modified by the Planning
Commission, Architectural Review Board or Director of
Planning.
4. The applicant shall comply with all legal requirements
regarding provisions for the disabled, including those set
forth in the California Administrative Code. Title 24,
Part 2.
5. Final parking lot layout and specifications shall be sub-
ject to the review and approval of the parking and Traffic
Engineer.
6.
Refuse areas,
be screened
Refuse areas
need.
storage areas and mechanical equipment shall
in accordance with Sec. 9127J. 2-4 (SHUC).
shall be of aC!:equate size to meet on-site
No noise generating compressors
shall be placed adjacent to
buildings .~
s. Project design shall comply with the building energy reg-
ulations set forth in the california Administrative Code,
Title 24, Part 2, (Energy Conservation Standards for New
Residential Buildings), such conformance to be verified by
the Building and Safety Division prior to issuance of a
Building Permit.
7.
or other such equipment
neighboring residential
9. Natural light shall be provided in at least one bathroom
in each dwelling unit.
10. Street trees shall be maintained, relocated or provided as
required in a manner consistent with the City's Tree Code
(Ord. 1242 CCS), per the specifications of the Department
of Recreation and Parks and the Department of General Ser-
vices. No street tree shall be removed without the ap-
proval of the Department of Recreation and Parks.
- 5 -
.
(
.
(
11. street and/or alley lighting shall be provided on public
rights-of-way adjacent to the project if and as needed per
the specifications and with the approval of the Departr.ent
of General Services.
12. Any outdoor lighting shall be shielded and/or directed
away from adjacent residential properties, with any such
lighting not to exceed 0.5 foot candles of illumination
beyond the perimeter of the subject property.
13. This determination shall not become effective for a period
of twenty days from the date of determination or, if ap-
pealed, until a final determination is made on the appeal.
14. The rights granted herein shall be effective only when
exercised within a period of one year from the effective
date of approval. Upon written request of the applicant,
the Director of Planning may extend this period up to an
additional 6 months.
15. Low flow toilets (1 1/2 gallons per flush) shall be used
in all water closets.
Prepared by: Larry Miner, Assistant Planner
LM: nh
CUP~87A
04/27/88
,
- 6 -
ec
e-
(
A'!'TACHHENT A
MUNICIPAL CODE AND GENERAL PLAN CONFOR}IANCE
Category
Land Use
Municipal Code Element
Project
Permitted Use 1 unit/900
sq. ft. of
lot area =
5.48 diu.
1 Unit/1250
sq. ft. of
lot area =
3.93 diu.
3 Stories/40'
1 unit/1250
sq. ft. of
lot area =
3 . 93 ( 4) diu.
Height
3 Stories/271
Setbacks
Front yard 101-0" lOI-O"
Sideyard 4'-0" 4'-0" W elev.
5'-6" E elev.
Rearyard 151-0" 151-0"
Parking 8 Parking 8 Parking Spaces
Spaces Prov1ded
Required
Lot Coverage . 50% 50%
tI
- 7 -
'1 '.,0_
'~;-~L.A84. Ir::rf' ,( IT' r-,:
, l5 ~.. .. l II . ..II ~
~~r, D I ~~ ·
a.,~,!~~;, q
'10 I" . /'0' I
. J: 1....- ~
~ I P ~L
~ ~ '" D . _
~ 1,. l! , II JI : D .1
~'~~8 O'f71
!f_~ ~ L08 r
~JW l/1.,~J8Iz 11 1;.-
~ ~:~EJ ~---" 8! ~r:-l \.. -~I_:
I ~ I r0"~ I:'~':
i."IS
" ~
1u "l -
- (
. (' ..... C .
. j
\
~
A
A
K
325
110"
. .....'"
; .n..
:Gilf . "',,.
..... t.....__..~oIi" -... -......
.
I
i'
.
o
z
<
a:
l-
I/)
To, h r::'1 ;; ~ 8 b-' -- ,"
;~ U[:i.~' fl ~ I ~~ --- ..
~ .~'l' .~; LJ I" i~" r
'>fj-t;j-ra '. J Qf~ J "r-':'i
'.---; -. - ~ 3~:!\... L - ..I)
;;;IICH OFIJESUS ri RCft:ri J .. ~G' ,
CHRIST OF Lf T TEll A4r "':r;;-" l" ;1 ;::
SAI,N::' -" Dr:.;:: ~::: ltA "'W-. I I - -. ,!
~:=.: I ~ "-f"!" _~I~
t _ .....~- -~~
. ~IF I 0J-r;l >
, .. .t? _ . pi #. IV.:: J 8'.-{~11 <
,~~ JMr It~, rJ'.
,..a
;l. -?T. -:-;- (~)
,
t
f
t
:J
ct'*"'""~ ..
, ."",
i :"1.
" '4.
t"of
. ,
I"~ 'filii'
U'o: D l
..... .
t
#"""""/1
~, ,
, . Ji
~
I
~
~t ..
--"1".- r-... I
i1 '- I
I ~ I~~
\:c ic.~;;I.r
J III I~~I
J 4 ' ". .., L . .
.. t . """;. OJ _.",..
.~ @ ~ ".."
-~. ~ ":l"'".. . . , . .
P Ie' G
m'
,
~
....
-,-,
.
e)~~:~~-
""
.
.
.
.
.
23
~
~
~
~
.
~"I'''' ~ _ ZL'M __1~
~~j J I
I:N~1 I r-:~r I~,; >>'" ~
," "~'I I : 1 ','
l~~ ~: (.:~~ ' Jr.
(M)1337 , .,11 . ~::u, If
I . ~; ~H-' . _"" .~n
] ('0]' r ~:'~J ,~~ 'v ED 8 IJJ
-- -I' ~ .." o.!! ._.1_1 \' -" " l'
Z4f1 /'tiN -0/ ~"'I",.,"ZS ~J1 Z.r.ll
-
l'IIl~
"-
O"'.D
ST
@'
w'
1!4(J~
J..1J!UJf In.
~~ _#_~: ~U
I ,.-., ~ t
--..8_ .!~~~. --
I~, .I-CWI
-A". /111 ~ilP
. .
{
....::~.SHI-NGTON
.....
IX:
LaI
...
(f)
:i
.J
o
:t:
111
e
MAIN
i'N'
-.[~r
,.~
., ,. I
, r~-;.;-:j ~1~ -,
.. f ,\I,lIJyi
7N( 'Ir--
[-- I'~ 'f;~
r.1 r-~-:-
""; ~t~~ I
_.. t
~^.. '
~'<;;
If . .
-~ -
ITII T
. .'
'iiii--
o
:.::...~
."
0:;;;-..
--
~ ...~
~~
I ,,,-,
IItl
.....
r:tJ-
BLVD
I, i "-11 t~'"
l I';;;' f~ t
. 6~'" II.... IJ ....
,..., ~----
I
I
I
1
.3 ~ ~
~ ~ 'l.: E611 $'
~ ! i I 'ACIf'~N6
.. '
~ ~ ~s I _...-...
_4 ,-.~ ",,1::./:.'-;
~ ~ .. .~:~
t
~
"
24
ICAU' 01 1'[(..
. . ..
LL..t... L.,j r I
...........~ ............-..r oM:
-
r
" '
,
( .~. .
~ C3 t 6 ' I;:,
o ..-, DID
}.... '1 ~'_ ~ _~
.~.
k' .. "',
,
---
,-
~ Q:'(o ~
cc
w
~
oil . ~ ." L ~
~ ....J
....J
r 0 H .\ I'
::t:
....-r.
Til.HT 'U
~i .:. 3 ,
L[D). ~
i~el'
.1 T · ~ ]. R'
I
z z ~ 0 .i. ~ .~,.
s..~ +_."
. .. tl ~,:""7:_~
~. ,
~ :; ~I~ ;'~
., ~.'
,
T
I, J:'
#
? ~ ~ ~. 8 9 '0
R "~~""r":"
1 '~ . 6 . ~ Q, ?C
~ ,
... .... ...-.
D
I:
.~.x~ 5
~
..........
"
IlU ..~ 100 ta.
W r '1"'.. [
~~, \:
s Iu B \ D
\ .. """12"
..,. I '90 ... , 000 ....
~ \
~ THIRD \
~ ~ ::~. ~~;r~I:;j~r~~~;j~!;j~,;. 11
d :. v .1;M~~I1El]~ i~ 1 c
- ?<~" Il""J!j;rl,,~"I'fflo ~f~t~;jX~~;~~ en ... ...
,,~:: _' ~l 'l~ 10 19 [10 11 1!13lI1':t~1i:)1il~lli~ ;:::! "I' !.
'" " , , - ~ -.. ~ ., - ~ ~ -, ri :2
I ~U' ~;ae' :.J - ~ i! t 7 11! ... ; N: ; II I. I JIt 11"1 :.. I n I .q .., I '101 1\ ~ X I H n ,;- i ~1- ...
~ SECOND j ~
· e ;Vjln:'i:~~ ~~ti '~:'~:I :;!~~~ :H~1~: :P;1~1~;:
'E ~1!.1". "'~I"r-"" ": I '. ,..,~".r"." '1";"1",,,1"'''1,,4'''''1,,11,,
:j . I : ! : , : ~f. ~ ~I ~'1~' I: II!
o ,81:.'9l0)1.1111l)'.35_~6".3839,6 '14,. \I.t" '1'48"9.50r511~"~3
:J: ~ ~ I! 8! , 81 i' V'bll sI ~i lI/ 0 '. ~, '81 ~ ~ l:t III ~ '
CI I ~J' , ~ ..... ~ V\. ~ ~ I "- ~~ I Ii . I \ 1 !i I ~ 11"'"' J ..". U '25- n i 1\ 'tS
ZOI o~. " "
~ "..-
- ___-.r....~ t~A!N
~ lDr., L:)fn ...;rt'13 1.a-..~-lc.JoTll L;Jor-" lO"to ''''II
! ,u,.: ~~4 -~.. '-.. ~I-\ "'. -~"-1"-'31-. .. '., .-, t. ...'..., ~J.,.., J.., -.. ~ ""\. r'l-'-"
If. ~ '''' .~.,' ~.. '~'.~I!~t ~}~~ ~".-,~",~ ~.:..~_~..
. K.. ....c J' ... . .~ ... ... jJ ... ....-- I' .Ii.... I
F --"...1 I. 1. J.- 4-1'.'.:Z-"t'i-liil:"~"i:"i11 IiII iii . . 1.7-.~ 1- -~ ......;; ..y, 1'';'--.::
~ If" ::----: I "" fI..... -'4" ._, . .. I 1 '1. _ .J...... __..'It I"l~~,?~~~~, ~"~"':
j .]' 'O~'\' ~,o'" 7:;~~ar II' . \ ..,;;. '
:S' \ NEil ~(')N ~
c;
~
~
..
s
-
,
I
I~ '0
";
17 II
B 10 ..
10 S I
'W
..
...
__L~
...
10.
....
,..
,..
v
A
R ·
s
STREET
:a
l::; I L UtA S. T RAe T
-w
0:
.....
,c.t)
, ~o
3"
...Ci
~ Ii
c
1
MR ..~..,w
.1.
\
'"
""
'00
000"
,..
<'oj
D
oil
t
..
u
..
.r;
~
Ii
~
~
II -
11
II
10
o
v
,
..
Ie
S
II ~ 01 ... Q,...
"
"
F
~
~
n
~
A 13
,
a
s
It
Io:l
s
a l" j "' I ~ :,,~ II
~ ~!, ~ IO~'~_
_ ~IC.. ~ Ql:l-:
,:- "..,' ~ ' " : ~ ,:~, @:; J ~
.. ."", :f.. I
o is .--:::::-- ---
~ STREET I X-
~W~"I."I"IWI~'" .. ::::"J":.:t;-'+J '",,;~:J"
If#< to 19 ~ '~i ; ',. 'T ~ '"":\.1/J-....) ".
"''''. . I . ~ ~ -""',
, .. 1&0 .. 1... .. -p: .. - .. - I ~ "'; !
,.hUIN ~-W.. OCOVRl ':.~" .... _
... .... I -' r\ ... r:- .~.. -.. iN .o.r_.w" II
s
. s
9
-
,
~~
I'"
~
: -
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Bw..- ~ ~ vauJh~ Qc.eav\ V;'vJ
}
jr aCt I 6 k~ q , P ( -7.-
7..4("" (.k, !l ~ ~ (
~
CASE NO.
STREET ADDRESS.
ZONE
APPLICANT
DO-Vl 9~~d.n
DATE
RADIUS MAP FOR
PUBLIC
HEARING
,
e e-
l c~~o~:o:..oGY OF DISCCSSIO;JS(
v.;I~H I~~Tl:RES =D ~\EIGHBORS CO:~CER:ar\'G
PLANS TO DEVELOP 245 HOLLISTER AVENUE
. )
]:
I
1987
November 2 - Plann~ng ComT.ission meeting. Comission adv~sed us that
we should meet and discuss our plans with interested nei-
ghbors to effect a compromise.
November 4 - Telephone conversat~on with Max Ganezer. owner of the ap-
artment next door. He gave no input but did exprss inter-
est in buying 243 Hollister.
November 19- Letter to Max Ganezer confirming the phone conversation of
Nov. 4 and requesting his assistance in arranging a meeting
wlth the resldents of his build~ng.
November 20- Telephone conversat~on with Dav1d Ganezer, one of the res-
~dents. Our w~sh for a d~rect meet~~g ~as ciiscussec.
December 12- Dl~ect meetine wlth Dav~d and Ell~ot Ganezer. No d~scus-
s~o~ of spec~flcs. only to scale ~he project smaller.
Decenber 18- Fl~st malling of post cards to every unlt, aSK1ng theM to
to call baCK to arrange a mutually convenlent tlDe to
neet and dlSCUSS. No response.
1983
January II - Second malling of post cards, o~e ~espo~se. Xeetl~g ar-
ranged for Feb. 9. Tha~ ~eetlng was cancelled due to t~me
confllcts.
January 22 - Lette~ from~the resldentp of the apar:~en~ (copy a~tached).
- February 17- Th~rd rnail~ng of post cards, suggest~~g a ~eeting Feb. 22.
Our post card crossed ~n thema11 a letter fro~ the inhab-
itants of 2328 3rd St. suggestlng a ~eet~ng March 1. (Copy)
February 22- Meeting. None of the ne~bhbors appeared. Ralph Mechur of
the Planning Co~~ission was present.
March 1
- Meet~ng with eight of the residents plus Max Ganezer. They
acknowledged our efforts to cOIDpTomise but informed us they
wanted an even smaller project: no h~gher than 27 feet. pus
the bUllding farther ~nto the rear yard and provide on-
grade parking. No more than three units.
,
l'
,i
t#'
.c
I
. ,
Mr. Danif~l F aa;:n
410 S. H,~u ~A:- fIve
Lcs ADgele5. CA 90036
.--
(
Fet:"u?~-~:'"
.. - ....,
~.=:'o-
Dear Mr. Ra9an & Mr. hurst,
We the re.~(ents of 2328 3rd Street were PRgerly ant~cJ??t~ng -he
February 9tl meet~ng arrnaged by you b~twee~ yo~=' ar=hl~ec: r~~=~:-~
Coffman, aD~ ourselves. Since that ~eet~c;, to 3ee the re1-p(cc:lle~
revisions ot your blueprint, was cancelled when Ms. Coffma~ couldn't
attend we ~'o~ld like ~o reschedule it w~ suggest Tues~pv M~Tcr 1
a time :;,;uff:c~e:1tly far from no",' to perl!'lt eve:-yone to Tn&.l:e 2.r:-nas:'em'~l1ts
tc. ~tterJ.d .c;:~riC: vie all d.o W~S~l tc 'lJ.elt..~ -.:l.LE :;~c......s "'::c ~eE .....;~.:::. .;t:'"':::-:::;.,'::' -.~E:
arp posc~blE. Please prov~de us wlth amp:e tJ~e to ~n!orm al: par~l~~
ccr.LCerrlec. srLovld t~arcl1 1st ~")ro\.-e urLCcrep' r-...cle, ~S ~11e ~c1: It:;:' '.:r..::::-~ 't..J~:
O~ the morn:no of February 9 resulted tn r~e~~ ~ncorve~l~n~e
T~e Inha~~t2~~S of 2328 3rd S~.
CCPY' Pl;J.r~!1.:nc. :::Cl:lDlSE10::
"
"
.
.
, ,
~..
j .... ':"""'I ~ 1- -.-...,.
... c...1a."t.- ~..... ~
#
-j
Mr, Daniel RO~2n
410 S. Hau5er Bl~d.
Los Angeles, CA ~OOS6
Dear Mr. Ragan,
.
(
~ ,.
- - ,
:~de
Since you have &ul~c~ted the op~n~on of the tennants res:d~n~ ~: 2=28 3rd st.
as to the speG~fJcat~ons regarding your pro:Jos~d proJ~ct at 21r Hc_l~st~r we
the ter.nant5 _12VF c.gree-:i or_ tr.e ttJll(w~r.g, WE;> tne- underslg:t.'Wl\.:!lc 11,.E: -:0 f
a builclng th"t c:1"ndes r-y ::b.e meso :'ccer<:: b'l:lr.~r::.:, c::'~eb !:"pt re. 'L~J J:.:'::':J 0.
Mon~ca. Thl., l::.. <; t:'..uldll_9 tt12.i: lS no m8:". tLe!. ::- :-ee:. t.l::~! :-:-or. :1:-= llwe!
to the highe:::,-: prH1l, (any r'ocf, peal: or fe~~ce), one. one the: h.J.c f'.:l rr:J:--e :ho...
3 rented cr 5<.>.le 1.:.n.l".;:s. In ::-egard~ 1:( an un"ie:-g:'o'..:.:1:: ]c.:-:ge, we C~j;!C: .:::: .::...cz
the J e c. p a I'd l :: !~ -r a ~ c -_ J ~ c e r t r= =- O? ~ ~ t _ e ~ j,J 'yo .. r- e C.l Z" Z' .: ;: -:'" c.... :: =-_ .: _ ~.1_ ~ _:-..:' ~ 1 ~ -=.
This 15 the O:lJy sort 0: bUllclng we wlll 2..:..1o~'; or. 1:::_5 ~O1:~ ?~"rlu~.( rr~;'e wo\...
be uni:..{ cept2.b. .=....... {-"\..... r '~''t l)~./-.r.il"l' \.J..~~",-..... -;-1-,<...... ,<- .\[.>~ I l...., - I) \.; L ~
J
~(l ,/L(-~rc.. (
.
~
~Qff3
_.d 91
(j..A......J.. ~.,..:;/'- 17 I 7
2~~d fr:1r A=L(
W.Y'Yl6-cf ~~fA- # tr;
~cMJ~.Jt;rJ -I-(.;L
~.~~ ~i/
~~~-1f1
$J ~~ 1-. ~ f5?
~C ~~.. 1T\t '-
o(~ ~7r-?- r.:S
'--'.)~~--~ z. /~~~C~'.\..\-
..) (j'" 0
0"'"' ~':>.... ,..rLN""t:-I~.l< 'So I
1/"", -/7/"'1 / ......r:7
_~"'_.~ ,/v...../(., . ~ -
~ ' ~
~IJ'( ~ ' J,\ , iflr, _ ~ I
,,' L(; -\~\ '1jt.lL-~ 11 { (
~~ r!~~--i
/) / CfJ1 -#J/ I
C(/.r-Cl~ CD
dY ~ -, /,:' ~'L'c! -:-~ I
'/VCv.- ...
.'
.(
er
DAi\IEL P. RAGAl't
410 SOCTH H.\USER BOL'LE\'ARD
SClTE ~B
LOS <\'GELES Cr\LIFOR,,\!.\ 00036
213 :934-(.920
Nov~be= 19, 1987
Mr. Max Ganezer
2216 Canrlen Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90064
Dear Mr. Ganezer:
It was a r>leasure to speal<: Wlth you on the phone on Nove:rber 4. Aftc~
all the messages left back and forth I'm olad "B flTIally aot tose~~cr.
I a~X.,r-ec1ate your lJ1te:-est JJ1 purchaSL"1g t..~e house at 245 Holhstcr ::!'c~
[111,! pa.r-...ner a'1::l re. HO\~'Ever, as I told you, ~ t 15 r1Y goal to 11 ve :J1 tl:.e
flll~shed produc~ at 245. Be:o~e 'j,".'e oought that property we searc:;ed 't.."tro;;-::-.-
out Sa.ita Maruca ior four rront11s and found nothL'1g even vaguely Sl.n.:lar.
F.s I a,-n s~e you kno'd, that nelghXrhocxi of Cccan ParK 1S very s?=c2..al --
qu1et an:::' IJeace::ul yet so near the o:::::can a"1d !.1.aL'1 Street _ I l..:1tcrG ':..:'1e
neT"; bU11dl..'1g at 245 to re a.T). asset to the ne1.ghtcrh:xxl, to f.:t 1..."1 1.-:: a.~c.
to peJ::'Ut ne\V faTL1.ll.es to share a..'1d cO:'l'c~lbute to 1.t.
F.s ! sale. 1.'1 our conversat:..cn, I :i..oo'.~ =o~,\-ard to rree':.:n~ vaLl:, ~'ou ar.::
t..'1e tenants 0: your bUl.lc...:ng to get L,:?ut -on tr.e arch~tGC-::T:"al era', .:w....gs Ior
the c:::mstructlOr'-. at 245. I ho~ t.l--Jat Wl~ the aCG.1.t1.0n of the 1.ceas 0: you
and yocrr tena,ts IT."j p~"1e:::- and I ,"1..::"1 be able to bU1.ld a p:::-O)Gct \-"":'l.cn lS
roth l.ll ha.rr:o::y Wl.t..."l your desl..:::::es a...iG. utl..ll.zes 1:he p::ltentlal or the pro;>=r<:.y.
Sl.nce our ph8~e CQnversatl..on I have t=1ed to reach yo~ several t~ieS,
unsucessfullv. I w~ll contmue to L..j' b..-:t l.= you F111 call:'le, tcx:::,- I ho~
we can ::i.'1d a t.ine to get to;e":..l:,er ",lith yo~ tenants to hear t.~el.r 1deas
in the very near future.
Very' t.."l11 Y yo~s,
~~
Dan Ragan
"
.
(
.
~
,
\
~.~......,'.. L _ _ ' _
~ .~T...~----tt..~-.":h
.
J
,
,a.._ ..
fo.J
-
i~~~
1~~
:r ~~14
.. .- ~...~ ...'~-..,;;...
rt--z,,,....._....:--.-.-. '-__1__-
. .\ PO.
,.
bpf-, I L/
. -. ~ Cd
c2 3 ;2 ? :J,~oJ:' _n '
.s".~ A~cd-/ CT
- - ~
-':
/: .-
,-- r...jJ ,.1",-
f '-~ I - 'V
~ usps 19~7
r~
-1'
,
~~-~.~ - ----......---.-,.-.....--.'-~.---.-.,. . ~ ----..-....-.-......~______w..........--."- "'--".-=:t
1/11/88
Hello agaln,
t 0 a Pr-_c.::'ca:-~
In late Decenbel'" we sen y u _ ...
Slf'111ar to t.hiS .!.nvlt::lS you- lnpu~ ::.n ::--e
prc;:csec co~struct1.or: - .. 2l.!5
receslgn of our c:.v
Holllste:- AVe~ue.
Plea~e call one o~ us as soon as cor.\enie~:
so we
can arrange a ruutually ag,eea~le t.lme to
. --
",
meet and dlSCUSS.
Thank you.
Kevin 1I5!i-1060
Dan 934-6920
~ ~ -"- ~U~I:3t."'-~..:"...._:>,I.
,
.. ~ -. -, ......."T_.....~_......_~~..___;:ij_~~-::--______~_.....--:.,.....___.,.. -.r-_
'I..
. ,-<-1
.~
. .
cup 487, TPM ~90(7
';prJ.I 26, 1988
CITY OF S~r'f ~ ~2~1~ ~
CITY PLA" Res~dents
~328 3r2. S'::.
"88 APR ~}nei :A~il~ca. CA 904J~
J1iv Planning D~vislon
Santa Monica City Hall Roo~ 212
1685 Main St.
Santa Monica, CA ~0401
,-
ifi.~~ ..
~~--'.-
~>!.'f JI
bear Santa Monica City Planners:
~ ~ ",--
We the underslgnEd cbJect ~tronglv tc the proposed pr~Ject at Z~5 I~lllst~r.
It is an Unne,:e~~ary eye-sere being :mposed upon our homes. A: tl~ prIo'
meeting with ~he Plznnl~g Commlss~on the In7estors were tol~ to a~l -n;s
meetings wlth thE nElghoors. we ~ou:d llke to pOIn~ ?ut that O\~y ~ne
meeting was 3rrar ~eL for our 'J 1ewlng of the all'i?ady cornp~etE:::'. lew ~ ~ a ,:s
and thIS was lion. Ot ly after a great" deal 0:: effort P-.lt rOr1::1 a-J u~ ;O.t ": 1':'5
meeting we Wel'e no~n t~e Lew 91ans rut" 1n ~ p)~Senta1:10L or.ly l~n~~r. At
the meetln~'~ cl,~e, It ~as clear thet our opl~~ons were n~t gOlug ~~ :e
taken into CO.!SH er;:;.t~on b'.: ~l':e b-,ulc..ers.
We would llke ~I.l ~'~an~rs tc please note the encl~sed CCPY ?I Jur ?etlt:Jn
that we all S Ln. : '",lC _''\.~:JJ:l':t:~d -:0 t:r. Rag~n ?.no. :.1r. ~e~rs't In J;:.r:'cr':r
1988, stat J.tlq Col".. _- ".c:: :::: ::'ecues::s for ::::ha.:iges. r:,e -.nveS1:or~ .laVE tc.~:eil
none of these ~~. ;"_[l~~S _~t~ account. thu~ l~nor~ng anc ma~ln; a :rsves:y
of the CommJ.::. 'J._: ,_::.:~...~::~ ::r:~r '::hat ~hey 'cor-.sult w~th the t1elqnLors."
There is no rJal cJ.~[ercncE betwe~n the =ur~'en't deSIgn, 2nd the deslg~
rejected by the (omrr1sslon on N9vemb~x 2, 1987. Four Un1!S ~ere lr.slsted on
then; four un~ts 2r~ ln3isted on now. Three fluors were insJ.&t3d on then.
three are Inslst~d rn now~ ThlS despite th~ Ccmmlssion's d1rec:: order
limi ting the nro~l ect to "t.. 0 stories and a 10ft." 'I'he se'tback 113.5 b~en
increased onl-, m~rglnally from a ridiculously cmall four feet. Their
suggested 27 foot heJ.g~t (rruch hiqher than anyone here wants) i3 ~tselt ai.
illusion. Un:leC( ss?ry-::hilJ'neys and an unnecessary su~deck (req:.tir:ng ~
three and a h.ll f foct s )lie. raIllng) will destroy for-~ver the s,.,eep~ng vi ~...,
from our th~rd t:oor. 7hlS ~s esgen~lally ~he same rnonst~oslty ~e :ought
and you reJec~ed l~~t y~ar.
We are rea&onlblf ~)Eoplc. ~nd would accept ~ r~asonable ~u~ljinJ tr~t 1S lot
out of scale Hltr our nelg~borhood. But we are all in strong oppos~tlon ~o
this project, wh_ch would completely and permanen~ly disrupt th~ l~ves oi
the 21 resldent& or thl~ b~ild1ng and those in the su~ro~~d1ng
neighborhood. Tte tact that this neIghborhood ~s already.too crowcpd mak~s
it no Jess of a relghborhood to th~se ot us who have long lived here and
loved it.
-
__ --_ -0_ ___ ..~ ...~ ~
-J--' -..-~-
~~ ~,cs
/"~~I/
, 9+-q
~. C'~ ~#-I
w~ 4tl{
~~~~dF!~~ Jflf
~ ~ *<6
~ :tt/2-
j;f;l ( ~c; GE>l..tA .A rrYJ ~.., -J=- 1 D
H - vf c1~ -!to
c}-J~ 00-~.,P'F tl -#' D
~~ *f= 'f .
/)~- ~ fl=3
~ ~--C +uS....~ "-f S
~ ~ -~ .:FJ-~/? .
/ t:0_~At~ ~ r 7;
6-1 Cffr ~Jf --- -
...--7 ~
'<' > . 7--~
) -4 ~ ~ z:. ~
V'--"t'-~~~~ /....- 2-
..
.\~.
;. "V'. V .-. l ~ - , - r- Cl-c., e ?....
6. ..... ..,; '" , ...;:.( "-I " -= 't I "'\ V
I . - ~, -', . - . - ,
! -V\o.\. ~~ ""'-""":1 11"04..> it Lit 1-1: ,:~
, ,/1....... "........J.oI ~ ....Ji' ~ ; I _. . ~ .., .. ...L,..
or;' -...._ J --\t ~ l..t'.,r
, ,... t f or..-' f;-r I .I'
'" '\c.. {'" ""t..1 ,--,--: L .:. r }
"'\ .;- J-
f ' '.;...~~ t... Nc'7'J.\.~,",,"" ,L
I 1" 3 J~~..U~., t. "-Y(J ..~ }',/ . :
I ~ >" t-t--{ <-0 :i-f I ~,,'-<-c'--"\. (! ~
J Ll/)> flc-1It i T:t~ R /1...... ~-. \ ../~
J ~ -
1---
...-
.~
.
J
--
January 22. 1988
Mr, l)an1 e 1 Ragan
.10 S. Sauser Blvd.
Los Angeles. CA 20036
..--
Dear M1. Ra.gan,
.0:. "'-4 ~
.
Since you have s~licited the opinion of the tennants residing at 2~28 3rd st.
as to the specifications regarding your proposed project at 215 Hollister ~e
the tennants haVE agreed on 'the tollowing. We the undersigb}:l woulc. like 'to Sf!
a building that abides by the most recent bUilding codes set forth in San:a
Monica. This is a building that 1s no more then 27 teet high from the lowes1
to the highest peint, (any roof. peak or fence). and one that hac no m~re th~
3 rental or sale unlts. In regards to an underground garage, we car.~ot cO:.dCr.E
the jeopard1=.lng of adjacer.t propertJes by the dlgginq O~ thh; 'Jll$(.unc he le.
Ttd!~ i~ tt..~ 0.11 Y ~'-)J' t c= bVllclD!d we: w.1l1 Q.Llo,,". or::: Uus: .J ot~ ~r!y-:hl:i y n =;-e wo\. J
be unaccertab~e. 2", "~c,.,i ""....'t t:)....h"'I.....~ \.s.oJ~4(.1- -thc,..... Ie Jt..ll" ......-.../cl b t.. I..'
11_ A. 1'1 .:Ii: :;.> Al..C.. ~ ~ r 1"-10 I c. ~
Z/o,__ ~ /I ....,
~ ~ 11/7
~d ~ . 1f=L(
~ (\_L~,~..Jf1o
~~~/~
~.~~ ~/I
~~-111__ .___H
$>~tP"1, f~
~~.. .
~~;1 ~r7Fc-
~~J~- ..t ~~~~'.~
~:r~ o...~~ ... 't
~.,_ ' :/J~z.
,.~ I ._.___ __ -?~_.. __ J __ ___......... __-_...__--....___ .. _ .._......-.-...._ ... ____~____ .........-..
, .
e.,
\....J
e)
a
Paulita & Err.llio Hernandez
243 Hollister Avenue
Santa Monica, CA 90405
DATE:
TO:
RE:
April 26, 1988
Santa Monica City Planning
Proposed project at 245 Hollister
(CUP487 TPM 19007)
Dear Planners:
My husband and I want to ask you again, like we dld last November, to please
keep this project from ruining our home. The excavation might cause our
little house'S foundation to collapse. Also, a twenty-seven foot h1gh build
would block all th~ light from us, invade our pri vacy, and generally make
life fo~ur family unpleasant.
They are saying that this is a neighborhood of h1gh denSity apartments anywa
so one more big bU1ldlng won't matter. Well, I am a single family house-
holder, and I neighbor on the proposed proJect. I was not consulted
enough on this, and am very upset at having to fight a big-City developer
again.
I grew up around the block, 1n a bUlldlng my dad still '
to all of thiS, too. Maybe something smaller would be OK~
make llfe mlserable for us by putting such a big, four-unit
project next door. As one of you sald last time, it's Just
our nelghborhood~ and with the lot they want to put it on.
Sincerely,
Paullta Hernandez
EmiliO Hernandez
and their chlldren.
<#
o &....I IV'- S
__... He objects
but please don't
condominium
out of sc-ale wi
_-__-r."...-~...... __.__.....-
__... ... ....~...-..r\.~.................n...-- ____ ....--__.aSl___.-.._..
,
.~
. L" U f
-~T?/l1
737 LaY
f1fJ~7
~io :
City ~alnning division,?oorn 2l2.Ranta ~onic~ Citv Hall,
16~5 Main Street,Santa Honic8F Cal.9~~Ol
c'
/
Fro~: The resinents of the apartment buildin~ at 7.32& Tbl~. ~t.
~auta Monica, and the owners of this bu1lrl1n2 (~ax and vlorenee
Ganezer) ad~o1nin~ the pTopnserl development at 245 Pollister Ave.
~e wish to submit for your consideration our stron~ .n~ unequivocable
o~position to this oro"osed develop~ent for the fol1owin~ re~8ons:
1. It would significantlv undermine an~ erode tbe nual1tv of lifp. in
the immediate neivhborhood.
Liobt.air,ocean brpe?-s,8unsbine, and ocean views all would ~e
substantially obstructed and reduced.
Heated exhaust fumes naturally rising from the 8 cars and nos~ibly
an equal number of motorcycles would befaftpd into the open windows
and doors of the nearby apartment building.
Add noises ~enerated hy vehicles arriving And leavinv a~all hours
of the day and ni~bt.
c.
Traffic congestion and ~ark1n~ problems vould be contributed by this
develooment. ~arkin~ is now a~a nremium in this preferential zoned
area.
These condominiums would ~robably be affordable and attractive to
affluent "yuppiesll in this area of Ocean 1:Iark with visitors competinl!
with residents of the neighborhoo, for the limited peaking spaces,and
of conrse,contributing to a worsening of traffic flo~ and con~estion
on nearby Main Street.
L. Burdeniop. of local life-support and utility systems
a Los Angles County iR ra~idly running out of s~ier capacity and ~ay
face a shortage of cap. city by 1991. This situation is viewen by the
city manager as a potential moratorium on development.
~.A. is considering i~posin~ atrict l~mits on amount of sewa~e that
cities~ includinv. S.~. could ship to overbllrdenerl Hy~er~on RewAge
Treatment Plant after July 1.
T
Lengthy water droupht lies ahead.
Severe restrictions on use are ~lanned for the L.~. ~etropolitan area.
I
\.-r
. \ j
......-
. _J
Community pressure for slow-growth
O Suggestions are widesoread for buildinp restrictvion8,downzonin~~down-
scaling, density reddutious,and halving of height limits.
This proposes development is a classic example of an an attemot to
squeeze the maximum amouut:of square foot livin~ aeea into a shallow
lot with no rear access; and sandwicbed betw.~n a 17 unit ao.rtment
buildin~(4 fret from the common property line) on the e.at side and
a SFa on theyeBt side. ~
The existing 17 unit apt.bldg. will be severly impacted by the for-
midable height and size and the SPA on the west would also be over-
whelmed by the height along almos,t the entire length of the lot.
And even the proposed 3 story building would itself be adversely
affected by.the close pro.imity of the aoartment buildinR on the east.
The proposed 4 unit condominium wouud have a sq.ft.area almos.t equal
to that of the existing 17 unit buulding sited on a larger c~rner lot.
(
L
?
o
c
L
.\
.
The four condominium project would hars~y affect the qualIty
of life of the exist1ng seventeen family bU1lding ad infInItum.
For the developer, there is the immediate incentive Of extractIng
maX1mum developmental profit from the sale of four condominiums
on complet1on. For the existing apartment building, there is
a prompt cutoff of vital environmental factors that make liv1ng
here so desIrable and inspiring; no fresh cooling breezes constantly
blowing from the nearby ocean--now a concrete wall effectIvely
bars the way. Substantially reduced light and sunshine 1S blocked
by the same concrete wall--almost within touching distance. and
of course, Ocean V1ews are closed to thIrteen fam1lIes and are
viSlble from the fourth floor of the existing building only.
There are many people who feel that the four natural factors
(light, aIr, sunshIne, and ocean view) are vItal to their health
and well-beIng. Medical science supports th1S VIew.
In naked terms, there would be an exchange of four condomInIums
(reachIng out for every square inch of land area and s~uare foot
of bUIlding area).
The proposed build1ng would be difficult to operate ~
and burdensome to the neighborhood, since all entry for cars, motor-
cycles, residents, and services must be carrled Into and out from
the front. The building must be serviced from the front, including
garbage collect1on, water, gas, and electric metering.
It would
be expensive to build. and therefore only affordable to the well-
to-clo. All gas fumes from cars must be exhausted from the front,
towards the street. If exhausted from the rear or sides CO fumes
would be dangerous to all forms of life.
.u
.j
!~-.
i
The return to the developer could be "lottery sized" or meager,
"'-..
dependlng on ththousing hunger at the time of completion and market
acceptance of expensive condominiums in a moderate income area.
On the other of the moral equation, seventeen families would
have ~o learn to adjust to a much lover quality of life.- ~Moving
for them out of the question. Where would fifteen families go
where the~tal rates are about one-half that paid by the two low
^
income HOD tenants in the building? This is an old but comfortable
building with all utilities centrally metered and probably the last
survivlng low apartment building in the city affordable to all
classes (profession to HOD, young and old). No gentrlficatlon here.
Maximum tolerable paramaters to acceptance of projected buildlng:
A) Height not to exceed two stories: Eighteen feet, 0 inches
from natural ground level to roof line, except for vents and f~replace
\.
chlmneys.
Absolutely no further helght or structural additions or extenslons
of any klnd whatsoeverl such as solariums, saunas, or gardens,
the latter to be housed elsewhere.
B) Side setback from common property line: Eight feet.
C) Density reduced by one-half, to two condomlnium unlts.
D) Exhaust Carbon Monoxide gas from the front to the streets,
and not the sides.
'--
Financial consequences of alternative building plans:
A) Repairs to existing structure may be economically feasible.
If not: A new single family residence or duplex homes of moderate
Slze can be comfortably and probably profitably grafted to the site.
B) SpeCUlative land fever in Santa Monica is so intense that
developer can probably (if so desired) dispose of the property,
1
/..1,
.'__1
. ~-)
......
purchased about fifteen months ago, at a profit.
C) Developer purchased existing building and site with full
knowledge of the impending down-zoning sentiments and imminent
building restrictions--caveat emptor. _
.D) Residential development is available to the developer,
but not at theprice of delivering a devastating blow to the qualIty
of life of the residents of adjoining buildings to the east and
west.
c
In summation, a course of development is clearly available,
profitable for the developer, and not grievously and permanently
damaging to the adjoining property owners and residents.
However, if developer is allowed to proceed as presently planned,
~t would cause great irreversible harm to all contiguous resident
neighbors.
It would further represent:
1. Acceptance of a last minute attempt by developer to CIrcumvent
building restrictions in force nine months ago.
2. Deny a strong public mandate and swelling outcry to control
unrestrained growth (including building height and density).
3. No regard for traffic congestion and air pollution.
4. No regard for increased burden on city sewerage system
nor for th impending water shortage.
5. Noregard for increased traffic across the street from
the City Fire Department.
6. No studies have been done by experts on the possibilty
of shifting soils, thus denying our old and large building proper
~.lateral support.
1. No regard for the City of Santa Honlca's moratorium on
sewer hOOk-ups (July, 1988).
/'